Language, Not Code Abstraction: Natural-language Training Shapes Brain-aligned Geometry
arXiv:2611.09027v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Code-trained language models produce positive brain scores, which raises the question of whether abstract structure learned from programming languages can substitute for natural-language training. We trained 25 GPT-2-small models on TinyStories, Python, C functions, x86-64 assembly, and the corresponding machine code, and scored them using a shared tokenizer and encoding procedure against matched random-weight models. On Pereira-243 and Tuckute2024
Read original source
Source record
Research analysis
Research claim
Paper identifier: 2611.09027. Source account: arXiv:2611.09027v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Code-trained language models produce positive brain scores, which raises the question of whether abstract structure learned from programming languages can substitute for natural-language training. We trained 25 GPT-2-small models on TinyStories, Python, C functions, x86-64 assembly, and the corresponding machine code, and scored them using a shared tokenizer and encoding procedure against matched random-weight models. On Pereira-243 and Tuckute2024
Evaluation record
Recent records to compare: “Asymmetric Correspondence Learning for Lexical and Style Embeddings: Interpreting Latent Space via Acoustic Features” (arXiv, Nov 9, 2026); “Representational drift in a code model: behaviour settles, which neurons carry it does not” (arXiv, Nov 9, 2026). Shared themes are navigation hints; they have not been verified as the same need or independent corroboration.
What the result supports
Interpret results only for the reported model version, task, data and inference budget. Community votes, downloads or a benchmark position do not establish reliability in a different workflow.
Validity gaps
Check sample selection, baseline configuration, uncertainty, contamination risk, negative results and access to code or weights. No reproduction by WeWorkBuddy is recorded here.
Verification plan
Read the paper or model card and its evaluation appendix. Reproduce one bounded result against the stated baseline, then test a representative user task and record where the conclusion fails.